This site is now in read-only archive mode. Please move all discussion, and create a new account at the new Victron Community site.
I have no idea if it's difficult to do...but it would be superb if a Color Control GX could be used as a remote panel for another Venus device. like a dumb terminal.
Lot's of situations where customers want a good remote control panel, and the CCGX would be perfect for this, this way you can have a display away from the actual installation, or just be able to use the extra connectivity that the other Venus devices have (but with display)
All true. I think Victron could sell quite a bit of extra CCGX units, so maybe they can make a user friendly option that works out of the box.. (slave mode)
I agree with @Boekel - if there was a plug-n-play 'slave' version of the CCGX with simple SINGLE cable hookup (used as a display & for control only) I think that this would be highly sought after...
I have recently setup a full off-grid setup (with no internet - yet) & have the CCGX about 10m away from the main electronics cabinet.
I have had to run 5 individual cables to the CCGX;
1- Power (fig-8)
2- Relay Output (fig-8)
3- BMV (VE Direct)
4- MPPT (VE Direct)
5- MultiPlus (UTP)
I do understand that there may have been other alternatives like running a VenusGX with remote console, but these were a bit too difficult at the time & a bit higher risk for stability.
It was not the exactly a job stopper to run all these cables to the CCGX which is a fair distance away, but it does seem a bit unnecessary & messy...
for your needs this is a possible solution:
https://www.victronenergy.com/panel-systems-remote-monitoring/canvu-gx
While I agree that this may be a feasible solution & potentially one with no additional hardware development costs, it will still require the user/customer to purchase 2x expensive Venus devices, but only fully utilize the capability of 1.
In my opinion, ideally the long term solution should be for the 'slave' screen/control unit to be exactly that & no more. That way the cost 'should' be able to be lowered to a point where people WILL want to buy & integrate it into a regular/standard setup. (Installers will for sure because it will simplify their work)
I do understand that priority vs resources available is always an issue that is difficult to manage perfectly. However, I do think that this is an additional piece of hardware that there will be/already is a demand for & accordingly it should provide good payback on investment. So although not a a 'code red' urgently required development, I do think that it would be a good business decision to have something similar planned in the works...
I kind of agree, but at the same time, the big appeal of the Venus GX is the three tank monitor inputs that do not exist on the Color Control. The cost of the Venus GX is is about $100 CHEAPER than a single VE.CAN resistive tank sender, in the US anyway. So for those that already have a Color Control and want tank monitoring, the Venus GX is a BIG win, it's only missing the screen. Not to mention the digital inputs, two relays, ect.
Now, if we can just get a Color Control GX Mark 2 that is a Venus GX with a CanVu touch screen ;)
Yep I totally agree - ideally I would like to run a Venus GX (or similar), situated in my equipment cabinet - then run a single cable to a 'de-contented'/'dumb' CCGX or even better a CanVu touch screen.
I too already have a CCGX.
The other big plus with the Venus GX is that it's compatible with Node Red, where as the CCGX is not.
Remote console on Venus is a VNC server.
Another approach might be to run a VNC client on the CCGX. Currently, VNC connections are only being accepted from the local host. I have not looked but that restriction is likely in the VNC Server configuration or iptables.
Just messing around, I've used ssh tunneling to get around this without making any changes on the Venus device and all has worked perfectly with a standard VNC client. I have not tried running a client on the CCGX though.
Did you look at the new Cerbo GX? I think that would fill your needs perfectly..
https://www.victronenergy.com/panel-systems-remote-monitoring/cerbo-gx
Hi Daniel,
Thank you for your reply, your suggestion will work well for future projects. The Cerbo GX and GX Touch 50 were unavailable in Australia at the time we constructed this specific job late 2019. Appears they may still be unavailable until sometime this month.
Thanks Wes
Hi
You can use a raspi as a remote unit, just set it up in to Kiosk mode. This is what is have done to remote monitor and control and Multiplus2 system, either via WiFi or Ethernet cable. Works great no issues at all.
Rob D
NZ
@Rob Duthie I sort of have the reverse of that - my Venus is the Venus-Pi running on a Pi 3B+ - and on the front of the enclosure I built for it and the 4G router
is a very cheap android tablet (Laser from Officeworks!) - it is set in Developer mode to enable the Screen to Never sleep, and it is powered from the Main batteries along with the Rpi, Router, Smartshunt and Battery protect. it has VictronConnect installed and works brilliantly as a Touch Screen console.
All drawing around 10 Watts. The Pi is connected via LAN to the Router, which also means if this was a House installation I could run the LAN connection for a Signficant amount of distance to then also use another terminal elsewhere maybe with another Wireless Access Point.
One thing I have found though - It seems the way they have setup the web server for the VNC websockets is there can only be one connection to the Remote Console at a time. I found that if you connect via the VRM Portal Remote console, or via using a Laptop just browsing to the Console - the Tablet device loses connection and gives you a "reconnect" button - which is ok, it works...but not quite as expected that there can't be more than one connection.
